Le 24-mars-06, à 16:31, 1Z a écrit :

> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> Le 20-mars-06, à 00:04, John M a écrit :
>>> A Turing machine does nothing (by itself). Don't take
>>> the power for granted. Something has to OPERATE it to
>>> do anything.
>> Why?  How could a digital machine distinguish reality, virtual 
>> reality,
>> arithmetical reality, etc.
> The question is about what computers are , form a 3rd-person
> perspective,
> not about what a machine would see from its own 1st person perspective.
> We know we have a 1st person perspecitve, and we have 3rd person
> knowledge
> of computers. That is the perspective of John's question. You question
> is
> from a machine's 1st person perspective. We don't even know that
> digitial computers have a 1st-person perspective.

It is our assumption. "I" am conscious and "I" am turing emulable. So 
some machine "can think".

> Your question might
> not even
> be valid.

It is enough that the reasoning be valid. If we get a contradiction, we 
will abandon comp.

>>> Bruno:
>>> let me draw your attention to one little phrasing in
>>> Hal's (and everybody else's, I presume, as I read
>>> these posts)- text:
>>> "If we assume..."
>>> And if we do not?
>> You will miss the consequences of the assumption. All science is based
>> on implicit or explicit assumption, related to (non definable)
>> world-views.
> Almost all science is based on the implicit assumption of a "stuffy"
> world view.

No. This is a simplifying methodological assumption, but there is no 
evidence it is necessary. Few physicists use it. Except the week-end 
when they doesn't want to be copnfronted with tricky foundational 
problems. True, the idea that there is a stuffy universe, and that 
"real" = what we measure, is in vogue since Aristotle, but it is 
incompatible with comp (this has been proved, I am not speculating. I 
can prove it to you if you are interested).

> Therefore, the burden of proof is on those who seek to deny it.

As I just said the proof already exists. See my url). (Not all realises 
this, and I don't insist because I like the idea of others finding it 
by themselves). But see my url or ask me. I don't pretend it is simple, 
but unless denying the 1-3 difference people who study it understand 
it, in general.



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to